NIAA Playoff 2019: Wanted to share some shots. Some you have seen before, but I hope some are new for you. Be safe. Nikon D500 70-200 2.8 vr. and 80-400 4.5-5.6 vr. SS 1/1600-1/2000 at...

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

Wanted to share some shots. Some you have seen before, but I hope some are new for you.
Be safe.
Nikon D500 70-200 2.8 vr. and 80-400 4.5-5.6 vr.
SS 1/1600-1/2000 at 2.8 approx.

(Download)

tshift Loc: Overland Park, KS.

Jules Karney wrote:

Wanted to share some shots. Some you have seen before, but I hope some are new for you.
Be safe.
Nikon D500 70-200 2.8 vr. and 80-400 4.5-5.6 vr.
SS 1/1600-1/2000 at 2.8 approx.

Jules my friend you are the best, DAMN these are really nice shots. Especially the last one TOUCHDOWN! I really wish you were out shooting, hopefully it will come soon. I shot a couple of girls basketball games Thursday. They look like crap!! I shot with my 80-200mm and they really look noisy. I was going to use my 85mm, but when I got there the A.D. and I were talking and he said see the blue tape all around the court? I said yes. He then told me don't go across it. All the tape on the floor was 15 ft from the court. He also said that if one of the people on the court players, coaches, etc. tested positive with Covid-19 they would have me quarantined also. Ain't they swell! Needless to say I stayed behind the tape. So I didn't even try to shoot with my 85mm didn't want to crop at all. Look at some of these and tell me what I did or my equipment did. These are a little underexposed I didn't export yet with corrections. Thanks

Tom

(Download)

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

tshift wrote:

Jules my friend you are the best, DAMN these are r... (show quote)

Tom:
Yes these are under exposed by at least a full stop or more. What were your settings on these? 80-200 lens hmm what aperture does the lens have. Minimum for bb is 2.8 if you are not shooting with that don't waist your time. Stay home where it's warm. I know the gyms have terrible lighting and now your another 15 feet back, again go home unless your shooting with a 300mm 2.8. I don't like shooting beyond the half court from behind the basket with a 70-200 2.8. No cropping at all. Noise yes it's there and that's why no cropping.
The 85mm 1.8 is the way to go with lighting like this but the distance says no.
Good luck.

tomcat

Jules Karney wrote:

Tom: br Yes these are under exposed by at least a... (show quote)

These could be fixed I think after exposure is corrected in post. Run them through TOPAZ AI to improve clarity and sharpness. I’ve processed many of these in the past. So don’t be discouraged

tshift Loc: Overland Park, KS.

tomcat wrote:

These could be fixed I think after exposure is corrected in post. Run them through TOPAZ AI to improve clarity and sharpness. I’ve processed many of these in the past. So don’t be discouraged

These are before processing wanted to show what they looked like out of camera. Thanks

Tom

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

tshift wrote:

These are before processing wanted to show what they looked like out of camera. Thanks

Tom

I would like to see how you would fix these in post. Let me know and thanks Tom.
I was sitting here with the computer playing around with some old images. I wanted to make them better.

(Download)

tshift Loc: Overland Park, KS.

Jules Karney wrote:

Tom: br Yes these are under exposed by at least a... (show quote)

I shot these at f/4.0 I wanted to have a little more DOF to see what it would look like. Bad mistake I guess. What do you think a 105mm micro f/2.8 would look like? Do you think it would get me close enough to get a decent crop in camera? I may go and shoot a game with that lens for a couple periods and see what it would look like. Things are getting weird. The last 4-5 days I have been sent text game changes. Either they are cancelled, moved or could be rescheduled. I don't know from day today what schedule is. I have to go into the league schedule each day to see. Oh well. I won't be shooting many long shots anymore, want to try and get all photos cropped right the first time in camera so I don't have to crop any when doing some post work. Thanks. Will email you soon to explain something.

Tom

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

tshift wrote:

I shot these at f/4.0 I wanted to have a little mo... (show quote)

you defiantly need the 2.8 especially with bad lighting. The more light the better as you can see. Or up the iso.

tomcat

tshift wrote:

I shot these at f/4.0 I wanted to have a little mo... (show quote)

What Jules said below.... plus, I also use an 85mm f/1.8 and get closer to the action. That 1.8 really lowers the ISO because it's 1 ⅔ more light than the f/2.8 is.

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

tomcat wrote:

What Jules said below.... plus, I also use an 85mm f/1.8 and get closer to the action. That 1.8 really lowers the ISO because it's 1 ⅔ more light than the f/2.8 is.

Agree about the 85mm under normal game conditions. I think Tom said he has to shoot behind yellow tape putting him well beyond normal. The times we live in huh..

tomcat

Jules Karney wrote:

Agree about the 85mm under normal game conditions. I think Tom said he has to shoot behind yellow tape putting him well beyond normal. The times we live in huh..

Oh yeah, it's been a couple of days and I totally forgot about the yellow tape thing. I'm not shooting my high school until covid-19 has disappeared. I've been training their yearbook editor and she is doing a great job with a D3300. Her pictures remarkably improved when the school bought her an 85mm f/1.8. But still miles to go, but she'll get it. Tom's best shot is with that 105mm for now, I guess. Anyway, good talking to you again Jules. Stay safe.

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

tomcat wrote:

Oh yeah, it's been a couple of days and I totally forgot about the yellow tape thing. I'm not shooting my high school until covid-19 has disappeared. I've been training their yearbook editor and she is doing a great job with a D3300. Her pictures remarkably improved when the school bought her an 85mm f/1.8. But still miles to go, but she'll get it. Tom's best shot is with that 105mm for now, I guess. Anyway, good talking to you again Jules. Stay safe.

Hi Tomcat:
I agree with you, best bet for your student is the 85 1.8. I found the best setting for me and my D500 for basketball is. 2.2 in bad lighting, but with LED lighting I can go to 3.2 for better focusing. These shots are with a D4. Showing the quality of this combination.
Be safe and be healthy.

1/1000 at 3.2 iso 4000
1/1000 at 3.2 iso 4000...

(Download)

1/800 at 2.8 iso 4000
1/800 at 2.8 iso 4000...

(Download)

1/1000 at 3.2 iso 4000
1/1000 at 3.2 iso 4000...

(Download)

tomcat

Jules Karney wrote:

Hi Tomcat:
I agree with you, best bet for your student is the 85 1.8. I found the best setting for me and my D500 for basketball is. 2.2 in bad lighting, but with LED lighting I can go to 3.2 for better focusing. These shots are with a D4. Showing the quality of this combination.
Be safe and be healthy.

Those D3s/D4 cameras cannot be topped for low-light, but my Z6 is so close that I've mothballed my D3s until needed for portraiture. I thought about lending her my D3s but I'm too afraid of a catastrophe happening and not getting it back.

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

tomcat wrote:

Those D3s/D4 cameras cannot be topped for low-light, but my Z6 is so close that I've mothballed my D3s until needed for portraiture. I thought about lending her my D3s but I'm too afraid of a catastrophe happening and not getting it back.

Word of advice for what it's worth. Do not lend an expensive camera to a non-pro. What trip your done for. Whether you use it or not, it has a lot of value.

tshift Loc: Overland Park, KS.

Jules Karney wrote:

Word of advice for what it's worth. Do not lend an expensive camera to a non-pro. What trip your done for. Whether you use it or not, it has a lot of value.

Real good advice. Better safe than sorry.

Tom